clarkscottroger | the Wakefield Doctrine - Part 54 clarkscottroger | the Wakefield Doctrine - Part 54

Clarence and Immanuel and Sigmund walk into a bar… the Wakefield Doctrine ( “hey, this thing is for you, not for them!”)

January 19, 2012 By

Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine ( the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers )

Given the hour of the day this is being written, we will do our best to kept the font small and punctuation slight.

 

Of the late, it seems the subject of these Posts is being drawn to a very fundamental, yet not clearly stated question; the answer to which speaks directly to the foundation upon which the Doctrine is built. The question is,  “is the Wakefield Doctrine a psychology1 or is it a philosophy2?”

This is not as daunting a question as first it may seem. As we often encounter around here, the “correct” answer has a certain quality of ‘ambiguety‘ ( as a scott, sufficiently provoked might be heard to say). The difficulty answering this question is grounded in the fact that the Wakefield Doctrine is not an empirical, data-supported system of psychological premises nor is it a multi-sylabic, hyper-hypenated thought-cave of philosophical notions.

The Wakefield Doctrine is a unique, productive and fun approach to understanding the behavior of the people in our lives.
And it is pretty safe to say…the Harvard Deans3 with their psycho-analyzin’ and dramatize’ of rigorous systems would not be inclined to use the word “unique” in the Introduction of their books and you would be hard-pressed to find a Philosophy Professor, writing a Graduate Level Course description thinking,  “…in this Course the class will be exploring the intricate  skein of thought and intentions, it’s fun too!”

So why the question in the first place?

Well, the thing of it is, the Wakefield Doctrine is based on the notion that, while we are all born with the potential, the capacity, the capability to live as a clark or a scott or a roger… it is not what we are, but where we are! (Stay with me, not as bad as it sounds).

For reasons not yet understood, we all exist in one of three ‘personal realities’, the characteristics of (these realities) correspond to the world of the clark and the world of a scott and the world of a roger:

  • in the first, an individual will find themselves cast in the role of the outsider, they observe the world and assume how things are meant to be, they live with others and try to understand and they act like clarks
  • in the second, we find ourselves in a landscape that is both incredibly full of life and yet is based on the ‘kill and/or be killed’ existence of the predator and prey, days are spent hunting food, avoiding being eaten and living as much as possible…the scotts
  • last of the three realities is the most plain and yet intricate; if you wake up in the world of a roger, you know that there are Rules and Guides, there is a place for everything and everything has it’s place

So what?  The thing the Doctrine says is this:

If you watch how a person behaves, you can infer which of the three ‘personal realities’ that person is living in and acting in and from this, you will know if they are a clark or a scott or a roger. You will know how this person will respond to virtually any situation. It is this understanding of the ‘worldview’ that the other person is responding to, that is the key to understanding their personality, not a list of adjectives attempting to describe their behavior and traits. Lets restate, just once more…
We are not clarks acting like ‘outsiders’, we are people who exist in a world in which our relationship to the world is that of the outsider.  We are not scotts because we are sexy and obnoxious in front of a crowd, we are normal people in an abnormal world. As rogers go through their day counting and cataloging, they do not say to themselves, “I am so good at this organizing thing’, they are simply doing what is natural for a person living in a reality that is based on the worldview of a herd”.

I hope this helps you get more from the Wakefield Doctrine.   Mr. Gatemouth?  …if you please!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rU1vJ94XPO0

 

 

1) Psychology is the study of the mind, partly via the study of behavior, grounded in science. Its immediate goal is to understand individuals and groups by both establishing general principles and researching specific cases. For many, the ultimate goal of psychology is to benefit society. In this field, a professional practitioner or researcher is called a psychologist, and can be classified as a social scientist, behavioral scientist, or cognitive scientist. Psychologists attempt to understand the role of mental functions in individual and social behavior, while also exploring the physiological and neurobiological processes that underlie certain functions and behaviors.         ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychology )

2) Philosophy is the study of general and fundamental problems, such as those connected with existence, knowledge, values, reason, mind, and language. Philosophy is distinguished from other ways of addressing such problems by its critical, generally systematic approach and its reliance on rational argument. The word “philosophy” comes from the Greek φιλοσοφία (philosophia), which literally means “love of wisdom”  (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy )

3) ‘the Lady’…better ask a Progenitor (or DS#1) but if you attend the First Wakefield Doctrine Global Pic-a-Nic you would be allowed to hear her very words!

Share
Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , , , , ,

the Wakefield Doctrine: Principles and Personalities (is this clear?)

January 5, 2012 By

Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine ( the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers ).

You know how we said that the New Year ( now the current Year) was going to be a time of organizing the information presented here, so that even the newest of New Readers will totally understand the Doctrine and be able to get a benefit from it, right the hell from the start? Well, this organization thing is tougher than I imagined. The problem is not that we don’t know the Doctrine and how it works and how to use it. The problem/difficulty/challenge lies in the  ‘how-to-explain-it-so-that-everyone-and-anyone-gets-it’, aspect of our presentation.
And you know whose fault that is, don’t you?
That’s right! It’s your fault!1  (Just a little editorial levity to offset the dreaded ‘you’re out here in the vast white space of an un-written Post)

Here at the Wakefield Doctrine, the primary writing guidelines have always been to:

  • have a good time
  • write about what I know
  • impart or convey or induce or whatever the hell is required to allow the Reader to come away from this Post glad that they spent the time to read it
So even though this year we have a “mandate”  to be better “organized” so that all our Readers can “understand” that the Wakefield Doctrine is a unique and useful and fun “theory of personality“; after all that, the writing of a useful, informative and entertaining Post has not gotten easier.
New Reader be advised. These Posts are meant more as conversations on the subject of the the Wakefield Doctrine.2

 The Wakefield Doctrine is a way of looking at behavior. Of people. That we know. (…or don’t know).

The Wakefield Doctrine affords us  a perspective on the ‘why’ of a person’s behavior, a feature that is missing in most of the mainstream personality theories. The reason this insight is possible is found within the core tenet of the Doctrine, which is as follows:

All people are born with a predilection to perceive reality as three distinct, characteristic (yet related) worlds. These worlds have rules and assumptions and understandings just like you would expect. What the Doctrine says is that you can live in any of these three worlds but for reasons not yet understood, we settle on one (of these worlds) by age of 5 or 6 and this becomes our worldview. We become clarks or scotts or rogers. We say this because we see behavior as being reasonable reactions and responses to life, provided we understand the reality the person is reacting to. A clark is a clark because they exist in a world in which they are the outsider, a scott behaves like he/she does because they are living their life in a world based on the predator/prey model and  a person who we call a roger is sociable and intelligent and petty and ‘precisely inventive’ because they have (chosen) to live in a world as constructed using the underlying assumptions of the herd mentality.

This might seem confusing at first. I’m sort of explaining it backwards. The way the Doctrine came to be was a result of serendipitous observation of a friend 3 and the inspired insight that his behavior, characteristic responses ( in other words, his personality) made more sense if the worldview that he was seeing was somehow different from mine. For those of us here at the Wakefield Doctrine, all behavior is easily understood provided you can see the world through the (other) person’s eyes. The description of the three personality types will help make the leap to the idea of the three world views. It sounds more difficult than it actually is. Oh yeah! One important detail:  all of us have the capability to experience the world as the other two do. I am a clark, but I have within a rogerian (and) a scottian aspect. When you start learning about the Wakefield Doctrine, you will find yourself saying, “What the hell! Most of the time I am sure I must be a clark but then I see what is clearly a rogerian response.”  All perfectly normal, it is proof in a sense that we retain the view of the world that ‘the other two’ personality types maintain. Just keep exploring and learning the characteristics of each of the three types, the one that you are will be the one that keeps popping back up.

So lets consider this the core premise of the Wakefield Doctrine. The world you are acting in is based on rules and assumptions that shape your options (in behavior, reactions, as we said above about scott, you response to the world comprises your personality type).
Remember that this is a reality of predominance, the world that you exist in as a clark or a scott or a roger is what it is because of a pre-dominance. You never lose the capacity to see the other two worlds. (In fact, it is critical that you never forget that, because that is where we will find the most productive, useful and all-around cool uses of the this thing of ours, in terms of self-development and change and such.)

Good start on the Year. Lets all give ourselves a pat on our respective backs for a good session (…I said, pat,  scott….pat! ) lol

We’ll do some more later in the week.

Guest Call out for this week’s Video Friday!!  Anyone want to come ‘on the air’ let us know.  It’s fun!  Ask anyone who has done it! ( Such as Molly or Ms. AKH or DS#1 or even the progenitor roger!) As a matter of fact, if you go there and ask them (at their blogs) for a Wakefield Doctrine hat (for your damn head) we damn well will send you one!

 

 

1) Superscript Lesson Number 1: when it comes to being inclined to want to assign blame for problems and difficulties, you are always safe going with  a roger

2)  the ‘we’  around here consists of a number of exceptional people referred to by various titles, Progenitors, DownSprings and Friends of the Doctrine (FOTD) and they are all people like you (New Reader). They came into contact with the Wakefield Doctrine and they found it: interesting, amusing, useful, fuckin incredibly insightful and fun and they have stayed on and contribute to the body of knowledge that we now have.

3) here read this  actually when you get there,go right to the bottom of the Page, that is the story of the first encounter with a Progenitor

Share
Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , ,

a tale of Two personality types… the Wakefield Doctrine a dream of change

January 3, 2012 By

Welcome to Wakefield Doctrine ( the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers )

( The Post intended for today has been delayed, so that we may bring you this…prompted as it is by certain, current events. Be sure to check in tomorrow when we will have the much more…formal….informative(?)…insightful and useful Post. Until then…)

Speaking of normal….  lol  I had a nightmare last night that I am totally proud of, and have been telling everyone today. But after I got through recounting my tale to DownSpring glenn, he  suggested I put the story in a Post as “an illustration of the efficacy of the Wakefield Doctrine, vis a vis as a method of effecting a fundamental change and (attendant) improvement of the core personality“.  For a scott he sho’ do talk funny.  Anyway here’s the story:

(A little backstory first: I am a clark. I hardly ever remember my dreams anymore, just a brief sense of something probably bizarre hopefully interesting as I wake up and then it’s gone all traces, thoughts, feelings and memories of however it was I did as I slept. As far as ‘bad dreams’,  I will have a nightmare maybe once every 2 or 3 years…standard fare, normal situation  some impending doom event arises and grows…anxiety increases until I wake up and turn on a light: maybe I will read a little, wait for the ‘excitement to go away and it’s  back to sleep.  But that was so not the case last night…)
As Readers may know, I have been ill recently, nothing serious but I was prescribed various medicines and antibiotics for treatment. This has been working well despite a lot of background pain and discomfit. In any event, last night I awoke to find Phyllis (my wife)  and Una (our dog)  standing at the bedside all concerned because, as Phyllis told me (I was) “yelling in your sleep, no intelligible words or anything but all in a  very forceful tone, Una even started barking“.
When Phyllis mentioned my shouting in my sleep, the whole of my nightmare came back to me. In it, I was standing at the foot of the bed, aware of something coming down the hallway towards the bedroom. This awareness was accompanied by a feeling of tremendous anxiety.  Now this should sound familiar to everyone, a very standard nightmare scenario. Though I looked out of the open bedroom door, I could not see what was approaching but I knew it was very bad and I had to warn Phyllis (who, in the dream, was asleep in the bed). So I tried to shout a warning, but I had no voice! No matter how hard I tried nothing would come out as sound, (again, Nightmare Special Effects 101). But I kept trying to shout the warning. ( A note: as a clark when I have found myself in a nightmare situation like the one I am describing, my dream self would always look for an escape and failing that,  the anxiety would rise until it would force me to awake, all before the approaching object came into view.)
Not last night.
(In my nightmare), I kept trying to shout to Phyllis to warn her until finally the object that I was dreading, the one coming up the hallway came into view. It was some sort of trailer (like a semi tractor trailer, without the part for the driver), and it was being towed up the hallway by some kind of farm-tractor-looking thing  ( being a dream it somehow was fitting in the narrow hallway). The anxiety level I was feeling went off the chart and then the funny thing happened.

I began to scream: “FUCK YOU!”  at this nightmare thing in my hallway. Nothing planned, no thought of escape…just an un-rational defiance…”FUCK YOU!”

Pretty cool, huh?

Now we have rogers here to advise us how to present the Doctrine in a manner meant to reach the maximum audience. And if I can reach him I am pretty sure he is going to advise against my presenting this nightmare as object proof of the benefits of the Wakefield Doctrine. But I disagree, I think that for those of us who understand how the Wakefield Doctrine presents personality in general and self-development in particular, will agree that the Doctrine can affect how you deal with situations and how you handle adversity and even nightmares. On a very fundamental level.

Damn!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wePM0aITzYc
Share
Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , , , ,

the Wakefield Doctrine…three personality types…” Jwaye nowèl moun ak tout moun!”

December 24, 2011 By

Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine ( the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers ).

Hey! Merry Christmas.
Glad you could stop by. All of us ( Progenitors and DownSprings and FOTDs)1  have totally enjoyed making your acquaintance-hood over the past 12 months. And we are looking forward to the year ahead, anticipating another 12 months of informative and fun Posts and  many more new photos of Wakefield Doctrine hats on (damn) heads sent in by Readers from across the globe. We especially enjoy seeing/hearing/talking to people about some of those who come here and read about the Wakefield Doctrine and then, at some later time, (these new people) are heard to say something about,  “...thats ’cause he is a roger” or “…you know, your life could be so much better if you would just not be so clarklike ” or even  “Hey!  scott! alright!! we gonna tear it up tonight!”

In today’s Post, we have  no ‘Big Message’ to convey. No subtle lesson, not a single gentle reminder or well-intentioned pitch for Reader participation. Today’s Post is just a ‘marker’, a way to force myself to stop, slow down and look around at this thing of ours. It may take me only a short time to write this and only a minute for you to read it, but for me, at this point in time, at this moment (4:22am EST to be exact) I can sit back in my chair and say (to myself…sort of),  “Really? You’re still here? …and you say you’re glad you made the effort to stick with this Doctrine thing. And those new people, the Readers and visitors? They are enjoying themselves? You say they ‘get’ the Doctrine… ( even without listening to me go on and on about the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers?) and they feel that they are benefitting from this thing of ours? And telling their friends?”

…..”damn! how cool is all that!”

 

…OK  time for quiet reflection is over!  Back to work!! This Doctrine won’t achieve world domination all by itself!  Lets get going!

(btw the ‘cover photo’ is of Ola, our first dog. Readers have no doubt seen that photo before, it is my favorite in that it captures Ola’s personality perfectly, “…big smile, big teeth”.)

… just so you can have the damn song stuck in your head for a week, here is a video of :

 

And just so you don’t get too warm and cozy, here are the actual lyrics:

Sleigh bells ring, are you listening,
In the lane, snow is glistening
A beautiful sight,
We’re happy tonight.
Walking in a winter wonderland. (ok nothing strange, it is a fairly attractive image, sort of what we remember about the song.)

Gone away is the bluebird,
Here to stay is a new bird
He sings a love song,
As we go along,
Walking in a winter wonderland. (still safe, expanding the imagery including local fauna in order to stress seasonal climate changes, safe, safe.)

In the meadow we can build a snowman,
Then pretend that he is Parson Brown (?)

He’ll say: Are you married? (Who do you mean, “Am I married”? what the hell are you asking that for?! …and who the fuck is Parson Brown?)
We’ll say: No man,
But you can do the job
When you’re in town. (!?! The ground is beginning to feel decidedly spongy…)

Later on, we’ll conspire,
As we dream by the fire
To face unafraid,
The plans that we’ve made, (Yes! The Plans! “…tell about the Plans, George! tell about the Plans…” )
Walking in a winter wonderland.

In the meadow we can build a snowman,
And pretend that he’s a circus clown (No, there is absolutely nothing funny/charming/cute about a circus clown made of snow, standing alone, in a field, not moving…yet)
We’ll have lots of fun with mister snowman,
Until the other kids knock him down. (Other ‘kids’? How old is this person, I mean he is talking about marriage for Christs sake!)

When it snows, ain’t it thrilling,
Though your nose gets a chilling
We’ll frolic and play, the Eskimo way, (Yeah great lifestyle choice, eat still warm animal flesh, kiss with our noses and give birth on an ice floe. Merry Christmas you weird-ass singing 27 going on 13 year old)
Walking in a winter wonderland.

 

 

1) Progenitor roger, Progenitor scott, DownSpring#1, Ms.AKH, glenn, DownSpring Phyllis, DownSpring Joanne, (Friends of the Doctrine) Molly, Nell Rose, Mel, Claire Peek, Pix, Jasmine, Alexandra, Alx, Ronin, Mel, Jason, Molly’s Mom an them, Debbie, Lise, Denise

Share
Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , , , , , ,

Video Friday ho, ho, ho…binyons! and a Merry Wakefieldian Christmas to everyone!

December 23, 2011 By

Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine ( the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers )

 

 

All of us here at the Wakefield Doctrine wish that all of you out there will have/find/receive/totally-frickin-lucked-onto whatever it is that you truly desire this Christmas season. While we are conveying this spirit of the Season quite un-abashedly, we are not going so far in our wishes as say, the central character in a timeless Christmas tale, who as exhibit A in the Case of the Excess of Cheer and Good Tidings, clearly makes our point.

“I don’t know what to do!” cried Scrooge, laughing and crying in the same breath; and making a perfect Laocoön of himself with his stockings. “I am as light as a feather, I am as happy as an angel, I am as merry as a school-boy. I am as giddy as a drunken man. A merry Christmas to every-body! A happy New Year to all the world! Hallo here! Whoop! Hallo!  (litquotes.com ) 

…we will, however, try to share some of the sense of gratitude we all have here at the Doctrine for all the new friends and Comments and photos of hats (on assorted damn heads) from across the globe, that we have been blessed with in the course of the previous 12 months of this year.

 

 

(We don’t usually do a music vid on Vid Frid, but I heard the following on the radio…what the hell, it is Christmas, yo

 

 

 

Share
Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , , , , , , ,
« Older Posts
Newer Posts »